http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58079
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58083
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49213
--- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Related test case (using unlimited polymorphism) from
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-08/msg00011.html:
type t
class(*), pointer :: x
end type t
type(t), target :: y
integer,target :: z
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58068
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49213
--- Comment #13 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #12)
type(t) :: x = t(y)
1
Error: Can't convert TYPE(t) to CLASS(*) at (1)
The patch in comment 8 turns this error into:
type(t) :: x = t(y)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602
--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 30616
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30616action=edit
Proposed fix
Patch I am testing. The problem was that ltrans passes got overzelaous on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57708
--- Comment #4 from Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Proposed patch posted here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-08/msg00194.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34938
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56780
Ingo Müller 2013.bugzilla.gcc.gnu.org at ingomueller dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58084
Bug ID: 58084
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr8081.c -O2 -flto
-fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (internal
compiler error)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58084
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57776
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
It is r200151 [1].
[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-06/msg00848.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58084
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm-none-eabi
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45290
--- Comment #15 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #13)
Just two minor leftovers:
(1) Making global variables in a program SAVE_IMPLICIT. (Does it even make a
difference?)
cf. PR 55207 (and apparently, yes, it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46206
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
The difference is that in the first case the TYPE_DECL Bar is regenerated and
the DECL_IMPLICIT_TYPEDEF_P bit is lost, the true value set earlier by
create_implicit_typedef is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55595
Dinar Temirbulatov dtemirbulatov at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49213
--- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #13)
type(t) :: x = t(y)
1
Error: Parameter 'y' at (1) has not been declared or is a variable, which
does not reduce to a constant expression
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58085
Bug ID: 58085
Summary: Wrong indexing of an array in ASSOCIATE
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58086
Bug ID: 58086
Summary: Installer installs files outside --prefix
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58079
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rdsandiford at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58087
Bug ID: 58087
Summary: Huge memory consumption with #pragma GCC optimize,
__attribute__ and long output paths
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602
--- Comment #12 from Yuri Rumyantsev ysrumyan at gmail dot com ---
Jan,
I tried to test your fix and got the following error message while
building trunk compiler (with your fix):
../../../../../trunk/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/fstream-inst.cc:48:1:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
Please, let me know if more info is needed.
Actually I got the same ICE in meantime. Here is improved patch (it is still
testing for me)
Index: cgraph.c
Configured with: ../../../../gcc/configure
--prefix=/usr/local/i686-tools/gcc-4.9.0/
--with-gmp=/usr/local/gmp-5.1.1/ --with-mpfr=/usr/local/mpfr-3.1.2/
--with-mpc=/usr/local/mpc-1.0.1/ --disable-multilib --disable-nls
--enable-languages=c
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20130805 (experimental
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58088
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46206
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
More correctly: it seems that when we parse typedef struct Bar { } Bar; we
create two TYPE_DECL: first, one marked as DECL_IMPLICIT_TYPEDEF_P in pushtag_1
(via
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58088
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i686-pc-linux-gnu,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58088
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Started with r187280.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58089
Bug ID: 58089
Summary: expanding empty parameter pack as constructor
arguments requires accessible copy constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58089
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Using list-initialization works fine:
X t{args...};
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602
--- Comment #14 from Yuri Rumyantsev ysrumyan at gmail dot com ---
Hi Jan,
I checked that all benches from spec2000 are run successfully with
-flto options and eembc_2_0 suite was also run sucessfully with lto
(for 32-bit mode).
So go ahead and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45631
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Not much ideas except for implementing more smart (=expensive) common value
histogram collection. I wonder how often such patterns hits us in practice?
The problem here is that the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58041
--- Comment #28 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks, for testing, I have submitted the patch for a review:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-08/msg00224.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46206
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56110
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56102
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58090
Bug ID: 58090
Summary: bootstrap fails comparison with
--enable-gather-detailed-mem-stats
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56369
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57540
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54473
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50099
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||patenaude
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57708
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55634
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58065
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40523
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55349
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48250
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43590
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54829
--- Comment #8 from Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Daniel Santos from comment #7)
First off, I apologize for my late response here.
(In reply to comment #5)
I'm going to respond a little backwards..
In fact,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53938
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53735
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57532
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Salamanderrake from comment #7)
What I should have asked is what revision is gcc 4.8.1 and what revision was
the fix put into trunk?
svn log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53056
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58080
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58080
--- Comment #10 from Nickolay Merkin nickolay.merkin at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #9)
Fixed for 4.9.0.
Thank you!
Will it be fixed for 4.7.3, or this version is frozen?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12081
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |other
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58080
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58080
--- Comment #12 from niXman i.nixman at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #9)
Fixed for 4.9.0.
Can you provide a commit number, please?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53189
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28615
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58080
--- Comment #13 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
If you need help, luckily today Jason provided a nice HOWTO here (the only
difference is that you want trunk, not 4_8-branch):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36416
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36466
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58067
--- Comment #3 from Ben Woodard woodard at redhat dot com ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2)
You can add -mtls-dialect=gnu2 to -fpic and -mcmodel=large.
Though doing that prevents the ICE, the compilation spits out about 78 lines
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41458
--- Comment #2 from Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Reconfirmed. Still happening
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40411
Lionel Cons lionelcons1972 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58080
--- Comment #14 from niXman i.nixman at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #13)
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revisionsortby=daterevision=201512
thank you
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58091
Bug ID: 58091
Summary: Non-ambiguous member lookup rejected
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
68 matches
Mail list logo